DOJ-OGR-00021241.jpg
741 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
4
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing / government report (excerpt from opr report)
File Size:
741 KB
Summary
This document contains an excerpt from a report (likely by the OPR) detailing internal conflicts within the prosecution team regarding the Jeffrey Epstein case. It features a contentious email from prosecutor Villafaña to supervisor Menchel, accusing him of undermining the case, violating the Ashcroft memo and victims' rights, and showing weakness by offering a plea with no federal conviction. The text also includes Menchel's justification to OPR, stating that while he understood Villafaña's anxiety to file charges, her tone was disrespectful to U.S. Attorney Acosta, who sought a more 'dispassionate' approach.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Villafaña | Prosecutor/Investigator |
Emailed Menchel expressing strong disagreement with the plea negotiations; described as 'very anxious' to file charges.
|
| Menchel | Supervisor |
Recipient of Villafaña's email; interviewed by OPR regarding the plea deal decision making.
|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Defendant |
Subject of the investigation and plea negotiations.
|
| Acosta | U.S. Attorney |
Villafaña's superior; described as trying to be 'dispassionate' regarding the case.
|
| Jeff [Sloman] | U.S. Attorney's Office Staff |
Person Villafaña wanted to present the revised indictment to.
|
| Andy [Lourie] | U.S. Attorney's Office Staff |
Person Villafaña wanted to present the revised indictment to.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| FBI |
Investigative agency; Villafaña noted the plea offer was unacceptable to them.
|
|
| ICE |
Immigration and Customs Enforcement; investigative agency; Villafaña noted the plea offer was unacceptable to them.
|
|
| OPR |
Office of Professional Responsibility; interviewed Menchel about the internal conflict.
|
|
| U.S. Attorney's Office |
The prosecuting authority.
|
Key Quotes (4)
"[I]t is inappropriate for you to enter into plea negotiations without consulting with me or the investigative agencies"Source
DOJ-OGR-00021241.jpg
Quote #1
"it is more inappropriate to make a plea offer that you know is completely unacceptable to the FBI, ICE... the victims, and me."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021241.jpg
Quote #2
"Strategically, you have started the plea negotiations as though we are in a position of weakness... by telling the defense that we will demand no federal conviction."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021241.jpg
Quote #3
"Menchel viewed the tone of Villafaña’s email as 'highly unacceptable,' and her understanding of applicable law and policy incorrect."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021241.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,601 characters)
Case 22-1426, Document 77, 06/29/2023, 3536038, Page69 of 258
SA-67
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 204-3 Filed 04/16/21 Page 67 of 348
SA-67
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 204-3 Filed 04/16/21 Page 67 of 348
In light of these concerns, Villafaña emailed Menchel, expressing her strong disagreement
with the process:
with the process:
[I]t is inappropriate for you to enter into plea negotiations without
consulting with me or the investigative agencies, and it is more
inappropriate to make a plea offer that you know is completely
unacceptable to the FBI, ICE [Immigration and Customs
Enforcement], the victims, and me. These plea negotiations violate
the Ashcroft memo, the U.S. Attorney[s’] Manual, and all of the
various iterations of the victims’ rights legislation. Strategically,
you have started the plea negotiations as though we are in a position
of weakness, anxious to make the case go away, by telling the
defense that we will demand no federal conviction. We left the
meeting on June 26th in a stronger position than when we entered,
and your statement that a state resolution would satisfy us takes
away that advantage. If you make it seem like the U.S. Attorney
doesn’t have faith in our investigation, Epstein has no incentive to
make a deal.
consulting with me or the investigative agencies, and it is more
inappropriate to make a plea offer that you know is completely
unacceptable to the FBI, ICE [Immigration and Customs
Enforcement], the victims, and me. These plea negotiations violate
the Ashcroft memo, the U.S. Attorney[s’] Manual, and all of the
various iterations of the victims’ rights legislation. Strategically,
you have started the plea negotiations as though we are in a position
of weakness, anxious to make the case go away, by telling the
defense that we will demand no federal conviction. We left the
meeting on June 26th in a stronger position than when we entered,
and your statement that a state resolution would satisfy us takes
away that advantage. If you make it seem like the U.S. Attorney
doesn’t have faith in our investigation, Epstein has no incentive to
make a deal.
Second, your discussion makes it appear that my investigation is for
“show” only and completely undermines my ability to deal with
Epstein’s attorneys directly. . . .
“show” only and completely undermines my ability to deal with
Epstein’s attorneys directly. . . .
. . . .
I would like to make a presentation to the U.S. Attorney, Jeff
[Sloman], Andy [Lourie], and you with our side of the investigation
and a revised indictment. The presentation will address the points
raised by Epstein’s counsel and will convince you all of the strength
of the case.
[Sloman], Andy [Lourie], and you with our side of the investigation
and a revised indictment. The presentation will address the points
raised by Epstein’s counsel and will convince you all of the strength
of the case.
In the meantime, please direct all communications from Epstein’s
counsel to me.
counsel to me.
Menchel told OPR he realized Villafaña was “very anxious” to file charges in the case.
Villafaña had put a “tremendous” amount of effort into the investigation, and Menchel “was not
unsympathetic at all to her desires” to pursue a federal case. However, as Menchel told OPR,
Villafaña’s supervisors, including Acosta, were “trying to be a little bit more dispassionate,” and
her urgency was “not respectful” of Acosta’s position. Menchel viewed the tone of Villafaña’s
email as “highly unacceptable,” and her understanding of applicable law and policy incorrect. In
particular, Menchel pointed out that although the Ashcroft Memo requires prosecutors to charge
the “most readily provable offense,” there is nevertheless room for “flexibility,” and that the U.S.
Attorney has discretion—directly or through a designated supervisor such as Menchel—to waive
the policy.
Villafaña had put a “tremendous” amount of effort into the investigation, and Menchel “was not
unsympathetic at all to her desires” to pursue a federal case. However, as Menchel told OPR,
Villafaña’s supervisors, including Acosta, were “trying to be a little bit more dispassionate,” and
her urgency was “not respectful” of Acosta’s position. Menchel viewed the tone of Villafaña’s
email as “highly unacceptable,” and her understanding of applicable law and policy incorrect. In
particular, Menchel pointed out that although the Ashcroft Memo requires prosecutors to charge
the “most readily provable offense,” there is nevertheless room for “flexibility,” and that the U.S.
Attorney has discretion—directly or through a designated supervisor such as Menchel—to waive
the policy.
41
DOJ-OGR-00021241
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document